A few things about Cooper's wild ride and officiating...

Kenny Lingus
Profile picture for user Kenny Lingus
Posts
1088
Joined
9/9/2016
Location
Watkins Glen, NY, USA
Kenny Lingus 3/19/2019 8:09am
3/19/2019 8:09am
To the best of my knowledge, no teams made a stink about it. But what would they know compared to some sexually frustrated rube that posts 30 times a day.
2
3
Rupert X
Profile picture for user Rupert X
Posts
11058
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Newark, OH, USA
Rupert X 3/19/2019 8:15am
3/19/2019 8:15am
I was seated on the other side of the stadium with a bunch of goons, seven beers deep. If not, I’d have something insightful, witty and, perhaps, constructive to say.....
5
wsmille2
Profile picture for user wsmille2
Posts
231
Joined
2/5/2019
Location
Durham, NC, USA
wsmille2 3/19/2019 8:20am
3/19/2019 8:20am
ML512 wrote:
It can, if Feld wanted to set up something like a "GPS signal receiver/booster" inside the stadium. The LITPro guys have tried it before and if...
It can, if Feld wanted to set up something like a "GPS signal receiver/booster" inside the stadium. The LITPro guys have tried it before and if they can boost the signal by bouncing it outside of the stadium, it can work. It's too expensive for them to do on their own though considering they go to the races for free/pay their own way.

But without it, yup, it doesn't work in dome stadiums.
Really curious to hear your take on this as a racer and not just a judge. Evidence shows that he gained an advantage upon entrance of the turn. He did not intend to jump off the track, but it happened and put him on the very inside, at the apex of the turn. Tomac knows Webb is behind him wanting to pass at some point. If you saw him out of the corner of your eye, you are going to check up or you'll end up like Broc Tickle in ATL 2014.
1
drt410
Profile picture for user drt410
Posts
2075
Joined
3/18/2017
Location
Boston, MA, USA
drt410 3/19/2019 8:22am
3/19/2019 8:22am Edited Date/Time 3/19/2019 8:26am
Underground wrote:
I'm pretty sure everyone thinks it was unintentional. Question is, shouldn't he have let Eli back past because he unintentionally gained a position or advantage, then...
I'm pretty sure everyone thinks it was unintentional. Question is, shouldn't he have let Eli back past because he unintentionally gained a position or advantage, then continued to race on? Didn't someone else do that back in Vegas one year? Or is that just a gentleman's code and these day's it's whatever gets the job done and as long as there's no violence it's all ok?
He didnt tho... He went in front, then was passed back by Eli, then he passed him after the apex.


This has to be one of the more annoying topics here in a while. I feel like everybody is at an understanding that the right call was made, but theyre using it as a way to make some bigger point about the sport/rules/riders...etc. Why not just say what you actually wanna say vs hiding it behind this? Your lessening your position by using something so blatently correctly called, that nobody is agreeing with you that there is some bigger problem, because this shows the opposite.
2
5

The Shop

See All »
Evoracer
Profile picture for user Evoracer
Posts
262
Joined
12/12/2013
Location
Anaheim, CA, USA
Evoracer 3/19/2019 8:23am
3/19/2019 8:23am
GuyB wrote:
Yeah, those are the kind of responses I was expecting.

I used to hate the term Vitard. But if the shoe fits...
TropicPilot wrote:
Why are people Vitards if they simply disagree with this decision? Webb unintentionally left the track, accidentally gained an advantage and probably shouldn't have made the...
Why are people Vitards if they simply disagree with this decision? Webb unintentionally left the track, accidentally gained an advantage and probably shouldn't have made the pass right there. Maybe dock him one position and move on.

For the record, I am a KTM Fanboy, but what's right is right.
You have to know what kind of "Soup..." you're dealing with here.
wsmille2
Profile picture for user wsmille2
Posts
231
Joined
2/5/2019
Location
Durham, NC, USA
wsmille2 3/19/2019 8:25am
3/19/2019 8:25am Edited Date/Time 3/19/2019 8:29am
Here is the angle from the viewers perspective. In the first picture, Webb is in the same line as Eli but I think we can all agree, he was probably going to head to the inside of the turn. I think it's clear from the screenshots that Eli was going to take the second rut from the top of the turn. He had to check up not even allowing him to get into the top rut, but cross rutting 2 ruts.










4
SK523
Profile picture for user SK523
Posts
34
Joined
10/26/2017
Location
Germantown, WI, USA
SK523 3/19/2019 9:21am
3/19/2019 9:21am
GuyB you and the "race decision panel" are wrong. I am a KTM fan boy and I have no clue how they didnt dock Webb atleast a position for that stunt he pulled.
8
4
dimetime
Profile picture for user dimetime
Posts
639
Joined
5/27/2017
Location
Huntington Beach, CA, USA
dimetime 3/19/2019 9:43am
3/19/2019 9:43am
Black Diesel Bomber wrote:
Honestly, just sounds like more of an unprofessional circus now based on what you just reported. A bunch of officials "Race Direction Panel" who don't understand...
Honestly, just sounds like more of an unprofessional circus now based on what you just reported. A bunch of officials "Race Direction Panel" who don't understand their own rulebook??? Got to be kidding? Where in their rule book does it refer to intent?? They are making a joke of themselves by basically saying, "well, because it was a mistake, we'll overlook the fact that rules were broken per our own rulebook"

"They didn't think there was any intent by Cooper"....yeah, I think most everyone agrees. But this doesn't mean he didn't gain an advantage with his little off track excursion (accident or not).

Do I think Cooper deserves a penalty because he purposely cut the track boundaries? Absolutely not
Does the rulebook state he should be penalized? Absolutely

The rules are the rules and if you don't enforce you will be seen as playing favorites. Think they would let Anderson slide in this situation?

Gotta wonder now what's really going on behind the scenes with these officials. They could have come up with a much better explanation that's in alignment with the rulebook, but the pull the intent card. LMFAO.
Face it FFS, you're wrong. All of you butthurt crybabies are fucking wrong.

So shit the fuck up with your irrelevant whining.
17
dimetime
Profile picture for user dimetime
Posts
639
Joined
5/27/2017
Location
Huntington Beach, CA, USA
dimetime 3/19/2019 9:48am
3/19/2019 9:48am
I sincerely think the absolute worst part of this is the shameful intellectual dishonsety.

This is purely and ET vs Webb thing. I know for a fact that if this situation was reversed there'd be not one peep about it from all the Eli nut garglers.

All your morsl preening and high horse bullshit is just that.........bullshit.

God damn l hate this kind if crap.
1
13
uneasy_rider 3/19/2019 9:51am
3/19/2019 9:51am
Webb got out of shape, landed on a tough block, about ate shit and could have T-boned Eli, but didnt. Nobody would intentionally jump onto a tough block, damn near hitting the camera to gain an advantage!
2
1
MPJC
Profile picture for user MPJC
Posts
2083
Joined
5/18/2017
Location
CA
Fantasy
176th
MPJC 3/19/2019 9:52am
3/19/2019 9:52am
I haven't read all of the replies, but I've seen enough to get a sense of how a lot of people feel - and a predominant complaint is that intent has been considered though it is not mentioned in the rulebook. I think that whether or not intent matters depends on whether or not it is typically used by them in assessing whether or not there is a violation. What we should want is consistency - if they differentiate between cases where people go off the track and avoid obstacles, and then re-enter the track ahead of riders who were slowed down by said obstacles vs. riders who inadvertently go slightly off the track and then recover, then that convention is, in fact, part of the rule, whether or not it is in the rulebook itself. A rulebook is always interpreted and it is incumbent on those who apply and enforce the rules to consider the broader context in which the rule has been applied in the past, and to be consistent with those applications. One can argue that they have failed in being consistent but the fact that intent is not mentioned in the rulebook does not, in itself, mean that it is illegitimate to consider it in deliberations regarding the application of a rule. The idea that the law includes both the written law and legal conventions that are borne out of legal practice and application is a basic principle of jurisprudence, and it applies here.
4
uneasy_rider 3/19/2019 9:56am
3/19/2019 9:56am
MPJC wrote:
I haven't read all of the replies, but I've seen enough to get a sense of how a lot of people feel - and a predominant...
I haven't read all of the replies, but I've seen enough to get a sense of how a lot of people feel - and a predominant complaint is that intent has been considered though it is not mentioned in the rulebook. I think that whether or not intent matters depends on whether or not it is typically used by them in assessing whether or not there is a violation. What we should want is consistency - if they differentiate between cases where people go off the track and avoid obstacles, and then re-enter the track ahead of riders who were slowed down by said obstacles vs. riders who inadvertently go slightly off the track and then recover, then that convention is, in fact, part of the rule, whether or not it is in the rulebook itself. A rulebook is always interpreted and it is incumbent on those who apply and enforce the rules to consider the broader context in which the rule has been applied in the past, and to be consistent with those applications. One can argue that they have failed in being consistent but the fact that intent is not mentioned in the rulebook does not, in itself, mean that it is illegitimate to consider it in deliberations regarding the application of a rule. The idea that the law includes both the written law and legal conventions that are borne out of legal practice and application is a basic principle of jurisprudence, and it applies here.
I think the determining factor on here is whether you are a Coop or Eli fan........
1
4
Dirty Points 3/19/2019 9:58am
3/19/2019 9:58am Edited Date/Time 3/19/2019 10:12am
uneasy_rider wrote:
Webb got out of shape, landed on a tough block, about ate shit and could have T-boned Eli, but didnt. Nobody would intentionally jump onto a...
Webb got out of shape, landed on a tough block, about ate shit and could have T-boned Eli, but didnt. Nobody would intentionally jump onto a tough block, damn near hitting the camera to gain an advantage!
But he did gain an advantage by leaving the track.

Nobody is claiming he intentionally jumped into the tough block. Penalty would not be for jumping on the block. It is for not ceeding position on track re-entry.

If Coop properly checks up upon re-entering the track, and then attacks in the next straight/corner, there is no discussion.
11
1
Dirty Points 3/19/2019 9:59am
3/19/2019 9:59am
MPJC wrote:
I haven't read all of the replies, but I've seen enough to get a sense of how a lot of people feel - and a predominant...
I haven't read all of the replies, but I've seen enough to get a sense of how a lot of people feel - and a predominant complaint is that intent has been considered though it is not mentioned in the rulebook. I think that whether or not intent matters depends on whether or not it is typically used by them in assessing whether or not there is a violation. What we should want is consistency - if they differentiate between cases where people go off the track and avoid obstacles, and then re-enter the track ahead of riders who were slowed down by said obstacles vs. riders who inadvertently go slightly off the track and then recover, then that convention is, in fact, part of the rule, whether or not it is in the rulebook itself. A rulebook is always interpreted and it is incumbent on those who apply and enforce the rules to consider the broader context in which the rule has been applied in the past, and to be consistent with those applications. One can argue that they have failed in being consistent but the fact that intent is not mentioned in the rulebook does not, in itself, mean that it is illegitimate to consider it in deliberations regarding the application of a rule. The idea that the law includes both the written law and legal conventions that are borne out of legal practice and application is a basic principle of jurisprudence, and it applies here.
uneasy_rider wrote:
I think the determining factor on here is whether you are a Coop or Eli fan........
Personally, not a fan of either.
2
drt410
Profile picture for user drt410
Posts
2075
Joined
3/18/2017
Location
Boston, MA, USA
drt410 3/19/2019 10:14am
3/19/2019 10:14am Edited Date/Time 3/19/2019 10:15am
dimetime wrote:
I sincerely think the absolute worst part of this is the shameful intellectual dishonsety. This is purely and ET vs Webb thing. I know for a...
I sincerely think the absolute worst part of this is the shameful intellectual dishonsety.

This is purely and ET vs Webb thing. I know for a fact that if this situation was reversed there'd be not one peep about it from all the Eli nut garglers.

All your morsl preening and high horse bullshit is just that.........bullshit.

God damn l hate this kind if crap.
Nailed it. This is such an annoying topic for that reason. Just say what you wanna say vs hiding behind some miniscule racing incident. Everybody knows the right call was made. The only difference is some people are using it to try to make a point about the sport as a whole, but failing by using this specific incident because everyone knows your over reacting and incorrect... so make a different thread about what u really wanna whine about vs wasting everyones time with this. /thread
2
9
Sully22
Profile picture for user Sully22
Posts
2021
Joined
9/9/2009
Location
USA
Sully22 3/19/2019 10:22am
3/19/2019 10:22am
Well, at least no one can claim Monster/green claw conspiracy theories or favoritism on this one...
1
jonboy688
Profile picture for user jonboy688
Posts
438
Joined
9/3/2015
Location
China Grove, NC, USA
jonboy688 3/19/2019 10:37am
3/19/2019 10:37am
i just wish i could jump that section and still make the corner all while not cross rutting and running over a tuff block lol
Dirty Points 3/19/2019 11:35am
3/19/2019 11:35am Edited Date/Time 3/19/2019 11:36am
Some of us just feel like the sport wouldn't feel like such a clown-show without random enforcement of seemingly random rules.

I don't even like either of these guys, but I do like AC92, and thought he should have been clearly penalized last year when he blew through the tuff block impeding other riders from off track after a mistake. This should be simple stuff to evenly enforce.
2

Pit Row

See All »
Dirty Points 3/19/2019 11:38am
3/19/2019 11:38am Edited Date/Time 3/19/2019 11:38am
Both are part of the same seemingly random history of written policy enforcement, based on who knows what.

That is what is the "clown show"
Dirty Points 3/19/2019 11:40am
3/19/2019 11:40am
Which is why there are specific written rules. Why not just throw away the whole book and say, "We'll do whatever," since every incident is different?
5
joeellis
Profile picture for user joeellis
Posts
695
Joined
7/5/2013
Location
Wilson, NC, USA
joeellis 3/19/2019 11:49am
3/19/2019 11:49am
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me to visit much less frequently. With that said: for the people complaining, do you want the rule book to try and capture every possible scenario that may occur during a race? Then it would possibly look like the golf rule book i.e., if this occurs, refer to rule 16:2c etc. I’m fine with the way the judgement was determined. Cooper crossrutted and did one hell of a job to not take both riders out. What do you complainers feel they should have done? Move Cooper behind Tomac in the final standings? Wonder what Eli felt about the situation. He was probably way less upset than many on here.
5
2
SK523
Profile picture for user SK523
Posts
34
Joined
10/26/2017
Location
Germantown, WI, USA
SK523 3/19/2019 11:51am
3/19/2019 11:51am
Ahhh yes let's compare the supercross 450 main to the local C class race. Good apples to apples comparison... Smile
4
1
Dirty Points 3/19/2019 11:54am
3/19/2019 11:54am
joeellis wrote:
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me...
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me to visit much less frequently. With that said: for the people complaining, do you want the rule book to try and capture every possible scenario that may occur during a race? Then it would possibly look like the golf rule book i.e., if this occurs, refer to rule 16:2c etc. I’m fine with the way the judgement was determined. Cooper crossrutted and did one hell of a job to not take both riders out. What do you complainers feel they should have done? Move Cooper behind Tomac in the final standings? Wonder what Eli felt about the situation. He was probably way less upset than many on here.
The rulebook doesn't need to be anymore explicit. Just enforced with the penalty and the rule written.
1
1
DoctorJD
Profile picture for user DoctorJD
Posts
2978
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Somewhere in..., GA, USA
DoctorJD 3/19/2019 11:55am
3/19/2019 11:55am
joeellis wrote:
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me...
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me to visit much less frequently. With that said: for the people complaining, do you want the rule book to try and capture every possible scenario that may occur during a race? Then it would possibly look like the golf rule book i.e., if this occurs, refer to rule 16:2c etc. I’m fine with the way the judgement was determined. Cooper crossrutted and did one hell of a job to not take both riders out. What do you complainers feel they should have done? Move Cooper behind Tomac in the final standings? Wonder what Eli felt about the situation. He was probably way less upset than many on here.
This is only a problem because it involved Tomac. Period. If this is Seeling/Barcia, it's a non-story. Tomac/Kawi fanboys once again showing their true colors.
3
7
zehn
Profile picture for user zehn
Posts
7895
Joined
1/15/2013
Location
Anchorage, AK, USA
zehn 3/19/2019 11:57am
3/19/2019 11:57am
DoctorJD wrote:
This is only a problem because it involved Tomac. Period. If this is Seeling/Barcia, it's a non-story. Tomac/Kawi fanboys once again showing their true colors.
There is no way to prove this. You just come across as a Webb fanboy for making this suggestion
1
1
TeamGreen
Profile picture for user TeamGreen
Posts
37467
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA, USA
TeamGreen 3/19/2019 11:57am
3/19/2019 11:57am
joeellis wrote:
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me...
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me to visit much less frequently. With that said: for the people complaining, do you want the rule book to try and capture every possible scenario that may occur during a race? Then it would possibly look like the golf rule book i.e., if this occurs, refer to rule 16:2c etc. I’m fine with the way the judgement was determined. Cooper crossrutted and did one hell of a job to not take both riders out. What do you complainers feel they should have done? Move Cooper behind Tomac in the final standings? Wonder what Eli felt about the situation. He was probably way less upset than many on here.
Wait a second!

I think this guy actually rides...might even race.

NICE response, sir.
4
uneasy_rider 3/19/2019 12:02pm
3/19/2019 12:02pm
uneasy_rider wrote:
Webb got out of shape, landed on a tough block, about ate shit and could have T-boned Eli, but didnt. Nobody would intentionally jump onto a...
Webb got out of shape, landed on a tough block, about ate shit and could have T-boned Eli, but didnt. Nobody would intentionally jump onto a tough block, damn near hitting the camera to gain an advantage!
Dirty Points wrote:
But he did gain an advantage by leaving the track. Nobody is claiming he intentionally jumped into the tough block. Penalty would not be for jumping...
But he did gain an advantage by leaving the track.

Nobody is claiming he intentionally jumped into the tough block. Penalty would not be for jumping on the block. It is for not ceeding position on track re-entry.

If Coop properly checks up upon re-entering the track, and then attacks in the next straight/corner, there is no discussion.
I get your logic, but I think it was unavoidable, hence no penalty. He would have been called out if he stopped, waited for ET to get through the turn, then went after him, at least I would. Its a pretty gray area, no doubt, but I don`t see how he really gained an advantage, as he was clearly faster than Eli that race.
1
2
uneasy_rider 3/19/2019 12:05pm
3/19/2019 12:05pm
DoctorJD wrote:
This is only a problem because it involved Tomac. Period. If this is Seeling/Barcia, it's a non-story. Tomac/Kawi fanboys once again showing their true colors.
zehn wrote:
There is no way to prove this. You just come across as a Webb fanboy for making this suggestion
I happen to agree with Doc, ET3 is the new JS7 in that his fans don`t want to hear any viewpoint except their own. I know I will get flamed for this, but it is the truth.
6
2
MPJC
Profile picture for user MPJC
Posts
2083
Joined
5/18/2017
Location
CA
Fantasy
176th
MPJC 3/19/2019 12:06pm
3/19/2019 12:06pm
joeellis wrote:
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me...
I refuse to read all the replies because I get so tired of all the whining on here. The negativity on this site has caused me to visit much less frequently. With that said: for the people complaining, do you want the rule book to try and capture every possible scenario that may occur during a race? Then it would possibly look like the golf rule book i.e., if this occurs, refer to rule 16:2c etc. I’m fine with the way the judgement was determined. Cooper crossrutted and did one hell of a job to not take both riders out. What do you complainers feel they should have done? Move Cooper behind Tomac in the final standings? Wonder what Eli felt about the situation. He was probably way less upset than many on here.
Good point. Sometimes it is better to leave a rule book slightly open-ended so that rules can be applied, hopefully with some common sense, in a way that is appropriate for the situation.
Boomslang 3/19/2019 12:11pm
3/19/2019 12:11pm
dimetime wrote:
I sincerely think the absolute worst part of this is the shameful intellectual dishonsety. This is purely and ET vs Webb thing. I know for a...
I sincerely think the absolute worst part of this is the shameful intellectual dishonsety.

This is purely and ET vs Webb thing. I know for a fact that if this situation was reversed there'd be not one peep about it from all the Eli nut garglers.

All your morsl preening and high horse bullshit is just that.........bullshit.

God damn l hate this kind if crap.
Eli "nut garglers"....Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing I'm remembering that one for sure. Classic!!

Move on gents, the decision not to penalize is final. Kawasaki chose not to protest for a reason..go figure.

Post a reply to: A few things about Cooper's wild ride and officiating...